In spite of all the BS Drek is posting how this is all boehners fault we know who the real architect of these tax hike is: Barry Insane Soetero. This was by design. While Barry talked about "helping the middle class" he was conspiring to destroy it. Mission --almost--- accomplished. And you stupid idiots rewarded him with a second term. Wait until the Obamacare taxes kick in.

What the 'Fiscal Cliff' Will Mean for You
By Bruce Watson

Posted 5:16PM 08/06/12

The economy is rumbling along, out of control, with nobody at the reins. Straight ahead, the road abruptly ends, yet the horses show no signs of slowing. Next stop: the fiscal cliff!

Much like a scene out of an Indiana Jones movie, the wild ride to Jan. 1, 2013 is developing into a perfect storm of economic and political pusillanimity. And in a sense, it's been headed this way since the first reel: Facing a financial crisis that threatened to sink America's credit rating, Congress agreed to increase the debt ceiling, but only if the conservatives were given a major deal to reduce the deficit.

But those same legislators were unable to agree on what combination of tax increases and budget cuts would be employed to shrink the deficit, so they punted that problem to a "super committee" of 12 congressmen and senators who were tasked with untangling the Gordian knot of America's finances. That super committee was given the best incentive a congressman could imagine to craft a compromise: Failure meant automatic cuts to federal spending across the board, painful to both Democrats and Republicans alike.

It wasn't enough of a goad: The super committee also failed, triggering those billions in automatic cuts, which will kick in on New Year's Day.

But that's not all. In addition to the federal spending cuts, the Bush tax cuts that have been in effect since the early 2000s are also set to expire on the same day, automatically raising tax rates. So unless Congress acts, the federal government will start charging its citizens far more in an array of taxes and offering fewer services in exchange.

This, is the much-talked-of fiscal cliff. And for the average American family, it could be a pretty rough fall.

How the Fiscal Cliff Will Affect You

To get an idea of how the fiscal cliff will affect the average American family, it helps to understand exactly what that family looks like. According to the Census Bureau, the median American household has 2.6 people and brings home just under $50,000. With the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, the first thing that will hit this family is an immediate, steep increase in the amount that it sends to the IRS.

After the standard deduction, the average family currently pays 10% of its income up to $17,400 and 15% of all income between $17,401 and $70,700. For a family making $50,000, this works out to $4,845 in base taxes. If we revert to pre-Bush rates in 2013, the average family will pay 15% taxes on all its income. For a middle class family, this works out to a tax bill of $6,397, a jump of $1,552.

[An earlier version of this story used back-of-the-envelope calculations to estimate an even higher tax jump. This version more accurately reflects the tax brackets and standard deductions of the pre-Bush tax code.]

Of course, nobody pays the full tax rate; every family gets deductions that decrease its tax burden. Unfortunately, many of these deductions will vanish on Jan. 1, too. For example, the child tax credit, which gave this average family a $1,000 tax deduction this year, will be cut in half, increasing their tax burden by $500.

If our hypothetical family has a child in college, it will feel the pinch even more. Currently, families that make $100,000 or less can claim the American Opportunity Tax Credit, which allows them to deduct up to $2,500 in school expenditures for every student for up to four years. On Jan. 1, that benefit expires, and the less-generous Hope credit is all that's left to take its place. Under Hope, families making less than $100,000 can claim $1,800 per child for up to two years.

In other words, a middle class family with a child in college can expect to get $700 less in deductions immediately, and $6,400 less in deductions over the course of their child's education.

It gets worse: the "payroll tax holiday," a 2% Social Security tax cut on the first $110,000 in wages, is set to end. For the average family, this will mean a tax hike of $1,000 per year. At the same time, the average middle class family will also get hit with the expiration of the "marriage penalty reduction," a break that was included in the Bush tax cuts. Basically, this cut enabled low- to middle-income couples filing together to pay less in taxes than they'd pay if they filed separately. With its expiration, couples will face an increase in taxes if they choose to file jointly.

Of course, average families aren't the only ones who will be affected by the fiscal cliff. For lower income households, the loss of the Earned Income Tax Credit will hit hard. This credit encourages poor families to work by partially offsetting their Social Security expenditures. Childless couples making $19,190 or less receive $475 per year, and benefits increase depending on the number of children a family has and the amount of money that it makes. For example, families with three children can receive up to $5,891, even if they make up to $50,270 per year. When all those other sweeping changes hit in 2013, the EIC will be scaled back.

In all likelihood, the average middle class family won't be affected by changes in the estate tax. Currently, survivors have an exemption of up to $5 million on inheritance, and pay 35% on any money above that level. On Jan. 1, the exemption will drop to $1 million and the tax rate will increase to 55%.

At the same time, the capital gains and dividend tax rates will also increase. The capital gains rate, currently 15%, will go up to 20%, while the 15% dividend tax rate will rise to match the income tax rate. These changes will be unpleasant for people who derive most of their income from investments, but will likely not significantly affect the average wage-earning household.

Sweeping Changes

Beyond the direct effects of the tax hikes, Jan. 1 will bring sweeping changes that will affect most of the country. For example, the Defense Department will see its budget cut by 10% across the board, a slash that will likely result in the shuttering or scaling back of hundreds of programs. And that will ripple through the economy in terms of job cuts, fewer workers spending less money, and in turn paying less into the system in taxes.

What's more, when those defense workers lose their jobs, they'll have to scramble for new work. Currently, unemployment benefits last for 99 weeks, but on Jan. 1, the limit will revert to 26 weeks. And that means an already-tight job market is about to get rougher as it is flooded with thousands of new unemployed at the same time that the currently jobless become a lot more desperate.

And there's more bad news: every "discretionary" program -- effectively, every program that doesn't have earmarked funds, will face an 8% cut. Schools, roads, public health, food inspections, homeland security, and almost every other federally-funded program will be scaling back services.

Even some entitlement programs are set to get hit. Medicare rates, for example, will drop by 2%, making it harder for providers to offer the same level of service, and setting the stage for a drop in the number of providers.

'Fasten Your Seat Belts. It's Going to Be a Bumpy Night.'

Given the broadly sweeping effects of the fiscal cliff, it's not surprising that the looming disaster has earned other names, like "Taxmaggedon" and "Taxpocalypse." The expiring tax cuts will hit every worker, and the reduced federal expenditures will ripple across the economy. According to the economic gurus, letting this happen will likely send the country back into recession.

Meanwhile, both parties in Congress are faced off against each other, with neither side willing to budge. Republicans refuse to allow the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to expire, and Democrats refuse to allow budget cuts to fall inequitably on the heads of the poor. Both groups are hoping to pick up House and Senate seats in November, after which they expect to enact an eleventh-hour solution that will rein in the horses, turn the stagecoach aside, and keep the economy from plunging off the cliff. Both sides are planning to be in the driver's seat when that occurs.

But will that happen? Wall Street, at least, seems to think a last-minute save is unlikely. As The New York Times reported on Monday, manufacturers across the country have decided to delay orders, hold off on capital improvements, and postpone hiring, largely out of a belief that the federal government won't be able to get its act together. What's more, as frightened manufacturers delay investment, the rate of economic growth is slowing, from 4.1% at the end of last year to an anemic 1.5%. In other words, while Congress is waiting for the fiscal cliff to arrive, it may already be here.

We can eliminate all entitlements and tax credits, combined with a 75% reduction in federal employment and spending and eliminating all federal pensions, all the financial problems of our country disappear overnight. Sounds pretty good to me.Posted via Mobile Device

Taxes are going up no matter what with a Federal Governemnt set to do nothing about spending. And be sure spending is our problem. Prepare your anus.

Lube sales are soaring.

__________________My Message to President-Elect Donald Trump:America did NOT became great because of what government did. America became great because of what the U.S. Constitution prevented our government from doing. The people made America great.

Warren Buffett, who has been a cheerleader for U.S. stocks for quite some time, is dumping shares at an alarming rate.

Will the SHTF?

__________________My Message to President-Elect Donald Trump:America did NOT became great because of what government did. America became great because of what the U.S. Constitution prevented our government from doing. The people made America great.

The Stealth Tax Hike
Why the new $450,000 income threshold is a political fiction.

Anyone still need a reason to abandon "grand bargains" and deals negotiated between this President and GOP Congressional leaders? Here it is: The revival of two dormant provisions of the tax code means the much ballyhooed $450,000 income threshold for the highest tax rate is largely fake.

The two provisions are the infamous PEP and Pease, which aficionados of stealth tax increases will recognize immediately as relics of the 1990 tax increase. Those measures, which limit deductions and exemptions for higher-income taxpayers, expired in 2010. The Obama tax bill revived them this week. It isn't going to be pretty.

Under the new law, some of the steepest tax increases may fall on upper-middle class earners with incomes just above $250,000. Here's why:

During the negotiations, the White House won a concession from Republicans to allow phaseouts for personal exemptions and limitations on itemized deductions, starting at an income of $250,000 for individuals and $300,000 for joint filers.

The Senate Finance Committee informs us that in effect the loss of the personal exemptions, currently $3,800 per family member, can mean a 4.4 percentage point rise in the marginal tax rate for a married couple with two kids and incomes above $250,000. A family with four kids in that income range faces about a six percentage point marginal rate hike. The restored limitations on itemized deductions can raise the tax rate by another one percentage point.

High-income Americans with incomes of more than $1 million may lose up to 80% of their itemized deductions for home mortgage payments, health care, state and local taxes—and charities. Cue the local symphony's development office.

Add it together and families in the 33% tax bracket could see their effective marginal rate paid on each additional dollar earned rise to above 38%.

A store manager married to a dentist with a combined income of, say, $350,000 may pay a higher tax rate under the new law than if the tax code had simply reverted back to the Clinton-era rates that Mr. Obama championed. Those earning more than $450,000 would see their de facto tax rate rise to about 41% under the new law, not 39.6%. Add in the new ObamaCare investment taxes and the tax rate on interest income is close to 45%.

How did this happen? Recall that early in the fiscal-cliff negotiations House Speaker John Boehner offered to cap itemized deductions to raise $800 billion, in lieu of raising tax rates, if the President would agree to spending cuts. The White House rejected that.

Mr. Obama then insisted on reviving PEP and Pease, thereby recapturing much of the income he claimed to be "compromising" away by agreeing to a higher income threshold for the top bracket. But instead of using phaseouts to offset higher rates as Mitt Romney proposed, Mr. Obama insisted on raising tax rates too.

Democrats are advertising the higher $400,000-$450,000 threshold as a victory for affluent taxpayers in blue states. But with PEP and Pease these Democrats are hammering their own constituents via the backdoor.

Taxpayers in blue states claim roughly twice as much in itemized deductions as those in red states. (good, Obama is about to stick it up your limousine liberal asses!)

Income tax rates are steeper in California and New York than Texas and Utah. Chuck Schumer just put a tax bull's-eye on upper-income Manhattanites, and Barbara Boxer whacked Silicon Valley. Some $150 billion, about one-quarter of all the money raised by this tax bill, will come from this stealth tax hike.

Mr. Obama purports this is merely "a return to the Clinton-era tax rates." But capital-gains rates will be about three to five percentage points higher than in the 1990s, the Medicare tax is higher, and his stealth tax will raise personal rates higher than advertised. Forget the golden Clinton memories. Mr. Obama is pushing the U.S. back to the Carter era.

A version of this article appeared January 5, 2013, on page A14 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The Stealth Tax Hike.

More evidence of the minor differences. It's too bad he was for this because capitalism breathes through these deductions and/or loopholes. It's really another way to pass a tax increase without calling it one. They must think we're all dumb.

__________________My Message to President-Elect Donald Trump:America did NOT became great because of what government did. America became great because of what the U.S. Constitution prevented our government from doing. The people made America great.

The Stealth Tax Hike
Why the new $450,000 income threshold is a political fiction.

Anyone still need a reason to abandon "grand bargains" and deals negotiated between this President and GOP Congressional leaders? Here it is: The revival of two dormant provisions of the tax code means the much ballyhooed $450,000 income threshold for the highest tax rate is largely fake.

The two provisions are the infamous PEP and Pease, which aficionados of stealth tax increases will recognize immediately as relics of the 1990 tax increase. Those measures, which limit deductions and exemptions for higher-income taxpayers, expired in 2010. The Obama tax bill revived them this week. It isn't going to be pretty.

Under the new law, some of the steepest tax increases may fall on upper-middle class earners with incomes just above $250,000. Here's why:

During the negotiations, the White House won a concession from Republicans to allow phaseouts for personal exemptions and limitations on itemized deductions, starting at an income of $250,000 for individuals and $300,000 for joint filers.

The Senate Finance Committee informs us that in effect the loss of the personal exemptions, currently $3,800 per family member, can mean a 4.4 percentage point rise in the marginal tax rate for a married couple with two kids and incomes above $250,000. A family with four kids in that income range faces about a six percentage point marginal rate hike. The restored limitations on itemized deductions can raise the tax rate by another one percentage point.

High-income Americans with incomes of more than $1 million may lose up to 80% of their itemized deductions for home mortgage payments, health care, state and local taxes—and charities. Cue the local symphony's development office.

Add it together and families in the 33% tax bracket could see their effective marginal rate paid on each additional dollar earned rise to above 38%.

A store manager married to a dentist with a combined income of, say, $350,000 may pay a higher tax rate under the new law than if the tax code had simply reverted back to the Clinton-era rates that Mr. Obama championed. Those earning more than $450,000 would see their de facto tax rate rise to about 41% under the new law, not 39.6%. Add in the new ObamaCare investment taxes and the tax rate on interest income is close to 45%.

How did this happen? Recall that early in the fiscal-cliff negotiations House Speaker John Boehner offered to cap itemized deductions to raise $800 billion, in lieu of raising tax rates, if the President would agree to spending cuts. The White House rejected that.

Mr. Obama then insisted on reviving PEP and Pease, thereby recapturing much of the income he claimed to be "compromising" away by agreeing to a higher income threshold for the top bracket. But instead of using phaseouts to offset higher rates as Mitt Romney proposed, Mr. Obama insisted on raising tax rates too.

Democrats are advertising the higher $400,000-$450,000 threshold as a victory for affluent taxpayers in blue states. But with PEP and Pease these Democrats are hammering their own constituents via the backdoor.

Taxpayers in blue states claim roughly twice as much in itemized deductions as those in red states. (good, Obama is about to stick it up your limousine liberal asses!)

Income tax rates are steeper in California and New York than Texas and Utah. Chuck Schumer just put a tax bull's-eye on upper-income Manhattanites, and Barbara Boxer whacked Silicon Valley. Some $150 billion, about one-quarter of all the money raised by this tax bill, will come from this stealth tax hike.

Mr. Obama purports this is merely "a return to the Clinton-era tax rates." But capital-gains rates will be about three to five percentage points higher than in the 1990s, the Medicare tax is higher, and his stealth tax will raise personal rates higher than advertised. Forget the golden Clinton memories. Mr. Obama is pushing the U.S. back to the Carter era.

A version of this article appeared January 5, 2013, on page A14 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The Stealth Tax Hike.

Bend over, here it comes again.... more money confiscated from your paycheck to be pissed away by the federales...

WASHINGTON (AP) — While the tax package that Congress passed New Year's Day will protect 99 percent of Americans from an income tax increase, most of them will still end up paying more federal taxes in 2013.

That's because the legislation did nothing to prevent a temporary reduction in the Social Security payroll tax from expiring. In 2012, that 2-percentage-point cut in the payroll tax was worth about $1,000 to a worker making $50,000 a year.

Bend over, here it comes again.... more money confiscated from your paycheck to be pissed away by the federales...

WASHINGTON (AP) — While the tax package that Congress passed New Year's Day will protect 99 percent of Americans from an income tax increase, most of them will still end up paying more federal taxes in 2013.

That's because the legislation did nothing to prevent a temporary reduction in the Social Security payroll tax from expiring. In 2012, that 2-percentage-point cut in the payroll tax was worth about $1,000 to a worker making $50,000 a year.

I don't have a problem with it. And I will be hit with the max, something like $2200. I thought it was stupid then and I think its stupid now to expect it to continue. Should have never been taken from Social Security anyway. The system is broke and their cutting the contribution?

Thats not to say I am not pissed with the way they piss away money. We need to get our fiscal house in order. I just think taking away from Social Security was stupid. They are going to end up raising the contributions soon. Maybe not for all but people like me who max out every year. Which in all honesty if I thought it would make a difference I wouldn't mind. But after the holiday we just had with the 2% reduction is just wrong.

$16.4 trillion – that’s the latest figure for America’s massive national debt. Nearly $6 trillion of this debt was racked up in the first term of the Obama presidency – a 50 percent increase. It is horrifying to imagine what the debt will be when Obama leaves the White House in 2016, unless Congress has the willpower to stand in the way.

Meanwhile, as the world’s superpower is literally drowning in debt, President Obama is basking in the warmth of the beaches of Hawaii, at an exclusive resort way beyond the financial reach of most Americans. The president pays the cost of his own family’s accommodations, but there are a large number of associated costs which are paid from the public purse.

What is the actual cost of Obama’s lavish vacation to the American taxpayer? A staggering $7 million, according to veteran White House reporter Keith Koffler, who wrote in his blog earlier this week:

In a move that is rich in irony, President Obama agreed Tuesday night to sign an emergency deficit reduction bill that does almost nothing to rein in spending and then jetted out to Hawaii to resume his vacation at an extra cost of more than $3 million to taxpayers.

The price tag is in addition to more than $4 million that is already being spent on the Obamas’ Hawaii idyll, bringing the total cost of the excursion to well over $7 million.

The added cost was incurred because by the time the Obamas return from Hawaii – whenever that is – the president will have used Air Force One to travel to Honolulu and back twice.

The White House doesn’t like to publish the costs of presidential vacations, but Koffler has done the sums:

Air Force One is known to cost about $180,000 an hour to fly. Based on an estimated 18 hours roundtrip flying time for the jet between Washington and Honolulu, the travel cost alone of Obama’s decision to return to Hawaii amounts to around $3.24 million. And that doesn’t include the price tag for the massive security operation required to move the president or the cost of the cargo plane that follows Air Force One around.

As Koffler notes, President Obama could easily have saved taxpayers a good deal of money:

The Obamas could have saved taxpayers millions by returning from Hawaii together after Christmas and then resuming their vacation at one of the many ritzy resorts that lie outside of Washington. If the beach is a must, even a trip to Florida would have been far less expensive.

Or they could have simply stayed at the White House or Camp David, each a luxurious government-run installation, billing taxpayers a relative pittance.

According to Koffler, "the total cost to taxpayers of Obama’s vacations to Hawaii since becoming president is likely in excess of $20 million, and possibly much, much more."

The message this sends is one of sheer contempt for the American taxpayer. $7 million may be viewed by the White House as a drop in the ocean compared to the overall size of America’s federal debt, but it is the principle that counts. The vast majority of American people simply couldn’t afford the kind of vacation enjoyed by the US president, not least at a time when 12.2 million Americans are still out of work.

For most of America’s embattled middle class, who, unlike the president have already returned to work, this kind of luxury is simply unimaginable in the current economic climate. And they’ve just been hit hard with a significant rise in their payroll taxes due to the expiration of the Social Security tax break. According to the Tax Policy Center, 77 percent of US households will now be paying more in federal taxes following this week’s fiscal cliff deal.

Barack Obama benefits from a largely deferential liberal press in the United States which rarely questions his opulence in office. It would be unthinkable for the British prime minister to act in the same manner. If David Cameron flew off to Hawaii and billed the British public £5 million for his Christmas vacation, he would be out of a job.

President Obama frequently calls on the American people to make sacrifices, but he is simply unwilling to lead by example and do so himself. In a speech in Virginia back in April 2011, Obama famously declared:

We are going to have to ask everybody to sacrifice. And if we’re asking community colleges to sacrifice, if we’re asking people who are going to see potentially fewer services in their neighborhoods to make a little sacrifice, then we can ask millionaires and billionaires to make a little sacrifice.

The president is elected to serve his country, rather than lord over it, a message which appears to be completely lost on the present White House. The federal government is simply running out of money, and America faces economic ruin unless spending is cut dramatically and the vast entitlements system is reformed. Barack Obama’s Hawaii vacation is merely a symbol of his wider presidency – a culture of impunity and extraordinary arrogance, reckless spending, a striking lack of accountability, and a shameless let them eat cake mentality. America’s middle class deserves to be treated better than this from a president who fails to practice what he preaches.